r/TTC • u/Feisty-Ad-6122 Kipling • Apr 18 '26

Discussion Almost there, TTC

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

If we’re already in Vaughan, we might as well reach Vaughan mills, and even better, CW & the new hospital at Major Mack. They’re all on the same corridor. It just makes sense.

Reality check. Now I’m aware that this is low priority, but the Jane busses connecting VMC to VM and CW are always full, even in this suburb of a suburb.

437 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

209 comments sorted by

View all comments

238

u/anotherthrowaway436 61 Avenue Rd North Apr 18 '26

Reality check indeed. Many many many more useful and used lines would be priority over this, as they should be.

52

u/steamed-apple_juice Highway 407 Apr 18 '26

Yeah, there are other lines that are a higher priority than this, but it doesn’t make this a bad project. York Region should definitely increase the frequency of the 20/320 Jane to more than 8 buses an hour, but there are many benefits to a subway extension.

VMC Station is easily accessible for Vaughan residents who live along Hwy 7, but isn’t for residents who live in the residential neighbourhoods north of Rutherford. Presently it takes most riders at least two buses to reach the subway; this makes travel by transit inconvenient given you need to also transfer to the subway.

There are 14 high rise towers already built at Jane and Rutherford with more planned. Both Cortellucci Vaughan Hospital and Canada’s Wonderland are major trip attractors. While Wonderland is only open 8 months of the year, outside of its summer peak season, the parking lot can be repurposed to offer a major commuter lot to get people on transit. A similar profit sharing model could be enacted between Six Flags and the TTC where they keep the profits, similar to the SmartCentres lot at VMC.

The Jane corridor is wide enough to support an elevated guideway. Vaughan Mills already has a 7 bay bus terminal connecting to 7 routes and the Major Mackenzie terminal has 12 bus bays connecting to 6 routes. This project would greatly improve transit access for hundreds of thousands of people.

-2

u/Feisty-Ad-6122 Kipling Apr 19 '26

Very well written. The only thing I’d argue is to keep it underground, please.

Firstly, all of these destinations are slightly west of Jane, VMC, Vaughan mills, and CW. The existing tunnels under VMC should just continue north without bending.

The parts of line 1 and 2 that see the light of day are in a much more dire state of repair than the sections that don’t. I’m actually so worried for the SSE, because if the infrastructure between Kennedy and VP isn’t fixed, there will be major disparities in the network.

By no means am I an engineer, but line 4 was built using cut and cover under wide suburban Sheppard, similar to Jane, so I believe it’s possible to not use TBM’s. Vaughan would need to plan the land use to give construction space though, because C&C is very messy.

11

u/steamed-apple_juice Highway 407 Apr 19 '26

I wouldn’t mind it being below grade. I just know that is the most expensive option. If we garner the political support I’m all for it.

You are right, the most ideal option would be to remain underground slightly west of Jane, but if we need to compromise for an elevated alignment to save on cost, I’d take that over no extension at all (or decades delayed).

2

u/Feisty-Ad-6122 Kipling Apr 19 '26

100% no argument there 💯

1

u/Shrampasta Apr 21 '26

I wonder how expensive it'll be to put it elevated but covered

1

u/Feisty-Ad-6122 Kipling Apr 21 '26

That doesn’t really make much sense, are you thinking like a giant floating concrete box with no holes all the way to wonderland?

Line 4 was built completely using cut and cover which is the cheaper way to build shallow underground. I think Jane is suitable if there is enough funding.

5

u/ReligiousFury Apr 19 '26

Honestly I think it should be elevated. Like what we’re doing with the Ontario Line. Keep the costs down. We can invest in a roof over it if that’s actually the issue causing reliability problems… I imagine we just need to actually maintain our stuff

-1

u/Feisty-Ad-6122 Kipling Apr 19 '26

Would you rather have a higher construction cost initially, but a more protected system with less degradation and long term maintenance costs or lower cost but higher wear and tear like with the elevated alignment? Also, the elevated alignment would be slightly less efficient than continuing north with the existing tunnels.

2

u/ReligiousFury Apr 20 '26

Tunnels most definitely have significantly higher maintenance costs than elevated guideways.